Alt. WW1

[nimbletoes]

Britain and Russia both decide that a war between Germany and France is non of their affair. Consequently, neither go to war in support of France in 1914. Facing the combined might of Germany and Austria/Hungary, (with no threat to the east for those powers) France falls by 1916 at the latest. The terms of surrender are that Germany takes over the French Empire in West Africa and Indochina--all French colonies go under German control.

Therefore...

No collapse of the Romanov, Hohenzollen or Hapsburg Empires;

British Empire remains strong and suppresses revolt, while gradually allowing statehood for various groups

No Soviet Union

No Depression (at least, not for the reason it occurred on OTL)

No Hungry Thirties, no rise of Hitler

No WW2

No Iron Curtain or Warsaw Pact

 

[Lalli]

I don't see any reasons why UK and Russia stays neutral. And Romanov-dynasty collapses anyway later. Russia was already near revolution. And Why Germany takes all colonies of France? Is Germany even able keeping these all?

 

[Pangur]

Britain and Russia both decide that a war between Germany and France is non of their affair. Consequently, neither go to war in support of France in 1914. Facing the combined might of Germany and Austria/Hungary, (with no threat to the east for those powers) France falls by 1916 at the latest. The terms of surrender are that Germany takes over the French Empire in West Africa and Indochina--all French colonies go under German control.

Therefore...

No collapse of the Romanov, Hohenzollen or Hapsburg Empires;

The survival of the Romanov's would require more than no ww1. Russia was rotten to the core.

British Empire remains strong and suppresses revolt, while gradually allowing statehood for various groups

Maybe however the US had over taken them ecomonically by 1914

No Soviet Union

If you mean no communist state to replace the Romanov's then that is possible

No Depression (at least, not for the reason it occurred on OTL)

How so?

No Hungry Thirties, no rise of Hitler

No WW2

two very different things here. no Hitler as Germany won ww1 - OK that's quite likely however no depression? very hard to avoid that ww1 ir nor and as for no ww2 - god no! An expanded Germany would have been at war with the British sooner or later and you still have the conflict in making between Japan and US/Britain



[/QUOTE]

 

[The Kiat]

In An Alternate History of the Netherlands, I used a succession crisis in Poland-Lithuania to spark the Great War (1913-16).

 

[DerGreif]

Britain and Russia both decide that a war between Germany and France is non of their affair. Consequently, neither go to war in support of France in 1914. Facing the combined might of Germany and Austria/Hungary, (with no threat to the east for those powers) France falls by 1916 at the latest. The terms of surrender are that Germany takes over the French Empire in West Africa and Indochina--all French colonies go under German control.

Therefore...

No collapse of the Romanov, Hohenzollen or Hapsburg Empires;

British Empire remains strong and suppresses revolt, while gradually allowing statehood for various groups

No Soviet Union

No Depression (at least, not for the reason it occurred on OTL)

No Hungry Thirties, no rise of Hitler

No WW2

No Iron Curtain or Warsaw Pact

I find it difficult to see Russia and Britain staying neutral. Especially Russia had a formal alliance with France, so they were legally obliged to act to defend France. Britain had no legal obligation to act but some very influencial politicians felt that there was a moral obligation to do so. Moreover there were strategic reasons to deny Germany a "crushing" of France. And if Russia stays neutral than there is a high probability that the UK will react to defend France. So you most likely will see either Russia or Britain joining the war on the French side, and - depending on the exact circumstances maybe both.

It would be helpful, if you provided a tangible PoD. If the war started like in OTL with the assassination of the archduke and an Austro-Hungarian attack against Serbia than the probability that Russia does not enter the war is very low. On the other hand, if Russia does not enter the war in such a situation, than the probability that France enters the war is very low, too. They had some own interests in Serbia but I doubt that they would consider them enough to intervene on their own and before Russia does.

To get such an scenario where Russia might not enter the war and you could get a German-French war is an escalation of the 2nd Moroccan Crisis, but that would be in 1911 then and not 1914. Furthermore Britain had made it very clear that they would support France in such a war - on the onther hand, Austria-Hungary might not do so for Germany. Not to mention that the German civilian government had no intention of going to war over Morocco. Interestingly enough you might get a Spanish support for Germany in such a scenario. If that were to be really helpful, is a entirely different question.

Maybe you could give some more details on the background?

I also think some of your consequences are not very likely. Especially the Romanovs will face some time in the future a serious revolt, if they keep their rule the way it was in OTL before the war. And that opens up so many possibilities for further development in Europe - good or bad - that there is no easy prediction.

Kind regards,
G.

 

[David S Poepoe]

Britain and Russia both decide that a war between Germany and France is non of their affair. Consequently, neither go to war in support of France in 1914. Facing the combined might of Germany and Austria/Hungary, (with no threat to the east for those powers) France falls by 1916 at the latest. The terms of surrender are that Germany takes over the French Empire in West Africa and Indochina--all French colonies go under German control.

Is this how the Great War happened in the Alternative Timeline you live in?

France went to war in support of Russia, who went to war in support of Serbia, in 1914.

There would be no 'combined Austro-German' forces facing France. The Austrians would, most likely, just sit out any second Franco-German War.

 

[LNSS]

Just have the system of alliances turn out differently. Not even the British and French together would be able to stop a combined front of Russians, Germans, and Austrians in France.

 

[OneUp]

I think a more interesting AH would be one where the Russians help the French, but the British decide to mind their own business. Than at Wars end you have a victorious but war-tired Germany, a shambles of an Austria-Hungary, A broken Russia, a resentful France, and a Italy that escaped most of the problems by retreating behind the Alps.

 

[Tocomocho]

To get such an scenario where Russia might not enter the war and you could get a German-French war is an escalation of the 2nd Moroccan Crisis, but that would be in 1911 then and not 1914. Furthermore Britain had made it very clear that they would support France in such a war - on the onther hand, Austria-Hungary might not do so for Germany. Not to mention that the German civilian government had no intention of going to war over Morocco. Interestingly enough you might get a Spanish support for Germany in such a scenario. If that were to be really helpful, is a entirely different question.

Spain was firmly on the Anglo-French side during the Morocco crisis.

 

[Badshah]

And why would Britain suddenly grant statehood to their colonies? They didn't want to do that at all, hell they didn't want to give dominionhood to India which was arguably in the best position to be given dominionhood.